|
|
|
|
|
by nickelcitymario
2605 days ago
|
|
No, not if we look at the entire supply chain and the construction of the power plant (whatever the source of power may be). But people don't get as emotional about the resources required to build windmills (so long as it's not in my backyard) as they do about nuclear. And once a windmill or a dam or a solar farm has been built, there's a belief that there's no ongoing environmental damage. Whereas nuclear (and coal and gas) require ongoing resource extraction. Again, I'm not the one making these arguments. I'm saying this is public perception. (Or at least my perception of public perception.) I happen to think the only environmentally responsible way to supply all the energy we need for 7 billion people (and growing), especially when more and more of those people are industrializing, is to go nuclear. Every other option seems like a guaranteed way to kill ourselves in the long run. |
|
But you need massive amounts of battery storage to actually power a grid with windmills and solar plants (unless you have a bunch of coal and nuclear providing baseload power anyway). And batteries are consumables which require intensive mining.